Follow us on social

google cta
US personnel wounded in 'dangerous escalation' at Iraq base

US personnel wounded in 'dangerous escalation' at Iraq base

The latest attack on American troops in Iraq sparked call between Sec Def Austin and Israeli counterpart

Reporting | Middle East
google cta
google cta

The U.S. military says it is still weighing its response to a rocket attack on the al-Asad base in western Iraq on Monday. Five U.S. personnel were injured, including one seriously, according to reports.

"Base personnel are conducting a post-attack damage assessment," one of the base officials told reporters, suggesting that the casualty count could change. Two Katyusha rockets were fired at the the base, and one reportedly landed inside. This was the site of the 2020 militant attack following the U.S. assassination of Iran's top military commander Qassem Soleimani in Iraq in 2020. Some 100 American service members were diagnosed with brain injuries after that incident.

The U.S. still has 2,500 troops in Iraq though there has been official talks in recent weeks over efforts to draw them down. However, attacks by Iran-backed militants on the American bases resumed two weeks ago as tensions continued to escalate between Israel and Hezbollah. The U.S. then launched its first airstrike in Iraq in months targeting militants it said were about to launch an unmanned drone in Musayib, north of Baghdad.

The recent attacks add to the 165 incidents on Americans in Iraq and Syria since Israel's war on Gaza began. The U.S. has about 900 troops still in Syria.

U.S. officials are expecting the worst as Israel conducted a series of Hamas and Hezbollah assassinations, including a top political leader, in Tehran, last week. Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin had a call with his counterpart Yoav Gallant in Israel Monday night to discuss what he called a "dangerous escalation."

"We agreed the attack from Iran-aligned militias on U.S. forces stationed at Al-Asad Airbase in western Iraq marked a dangerous escalation, and I updated Minister Gallant on measures to strengthen U.S. military posture in light of this escalating situation," Austin posted on X.


While Washington invariably claims our troops are there to confront ISIS remnants and/or Iranian proxies, critics say there is no strategic value to remaining in the region, that these troops are caught in the crossfire of a regional conflict. "Shooting rockets at U.S. bases is a time-tested way for Iran and its proxy militias to harass the Americans whenever the heat rises," charged Defense Priorities analyst and writer Dan DePetris on X shortly after the latest attacks were reported. "They can dial the pressure up or down depending on the circumstances. Removing U.S. forces would remove that card."


AL ASAD AIR BASE, Iraq – Soldiers from Company D, 10th Aviation Regiment, 10th Mountain Division, move a MQ-1C Gray Eagle into position prior to conducting a mission at Al Asad Air Base, Iraq, August, 4,2017. . (U.S. Army photo by Capt. Stephen James)

google cta
Reporting | Middle East
Dan Caine
Top photo credit: Secretary of War Pete Hegseth and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff U.S. Air Force Gen. Dan Caine conduct a press briefing on Operation Epic Fury at the Pentagon, Washington, D.C., March 4, 2026. (DoW photo by U.S. Navy Petty Officer 1st Class Alexander Kubitza)

Did Caine just announce the Morgenthau option for Iran?

QiOSK

Gen. Dan Caine’s formulation of American war aims in Iran is remarkable not because it is bellicose, but because it is strategically incoherent.

In a press conference Tuesday morning, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff did not describe a limited campaign to suppress missile fire, blunt Iran’s naval threat, or even impose a severe but bounded setback on Tehran’s coercive instruments. He described a campaign against Iran’s “military and industrial base” designed to prevent the regime from attacking Americans, U.S. interests, and regional partners “for years to come.” In an earlier briefing he put the objective similarly: to prevent Iran from projecting power outside its borders. Rather than the language of a discrete coercive operation, this describes a war against a state’s capacity to regenerate power.

keep readingShow less
Mbs-mbz-scaled
UAE President Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed al-Nahyan receives Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman at the Presidential Airport in Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates November 27, 2019. WAM/Handout via REUTERS

Is the US goading Arab states to join war against Iran?

QiOSK

On Sunday, U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Mike Waltz told ABC News that Arab Gulf states may soon step up their involvement in the U.S.-Israeli war on Iran. “I expect that you'll see additional diplomatic and possibly military action from them in the coming days and weeks,” Waltz said.

Then, on Monday morning, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) slammed Saudi Arabia for staying out of the war even as “Americans are dying and the U.S. is spending billions” of dollars to conduct regime change in Iran. “If you are not willing to use your military now, when are you willing to use it?” Graham asked. “Hopefully this changes soon. If not, consequences will follow.”

keep readingShow less
Why Tehran may have time on its side
Top image credit: Iranian army military personnel stand at attention under a banner featuring an image of an Iranian-made unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) during a military parade commemorating the anniversary of Army Day outside the Shrine of Iran's late leader Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini in the south of Tehran, Iran, on April 18, 2025. (Photo by Morteza Nikoubazl/NurPhoto)

Why Tehran may have time on its side

QiOSK

A provocative calculus by Anusar Farrouqui (“policytensor”) has been circulating on X and in more exhaustive form on the author’s Substack. It purports to demonstrate a sobering reality: in a high-intensity U.S.-Iran conflict, the United States may be unable to suppress Iranian drone production quickly enough to prevent a strategically consequential period of regional devastation.

The argument is framed through a quantitative lens, carrying the seductive appeal of mathematical precision. It arranges variables—such as U.S. sortie rates and degradation efficiency against Iranian repair cycles and rebuild speeds—to suggest a "sustainable firing rate." The implication is that Iran could maintain a persistent strike capability long enough to exhaust American political patience, forcing Washington toward a premature declaration of success or an unfavorable ceasefire.

keep readingShow less
google cta
Want more of our stories on Google?
Click here to make us a Preferred Source.

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.